Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

linuxfoundation.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 195 posts

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#101

Post by zekevermillion »

bomdo wrote: post #20

Apparently, being a platinum member entails donating $500k [1], so it's not that big a deal for Microsoft ($85B revenue[2]). And as the article states, there has been negativity in the linux community regarding the old arch-enemy joining their ranks. Looking at the new Microsoft however, I think it's fair to assume that the days of "embrace, extend and extinguish"[3] are over and they are genuinely interested in coop…

This is the ultimate embrace, extend move. Hopefully it means MS has reconciled itself to the fact that it cannot easily extinguish Linux. I would expect MS to use this position to divert headlines away from the concept of free software, and toward the MS brand; and to introduce dependencies to third-party software that makes it difficult to extract MS proprietary code entirely from the Linux ecosystem.

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#103

Post by richardwhiuk »

cyphar wrote: post #92
paulddraper wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(1) That's hair splitting of common usage. Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux "Linux was originally developed as a free operating system for personal computers based on the Intel x86 architecture" "Linux has the largest installed base of all general-purpose operating systems." "Linux is not the only such operating system" "Linux is also the leading operating system on servers and other big iron systems" I'm…

> (1) That's hair splitting of common usage. The operating system's technical name is GNU/Linux[1]. Many people call it Linux incorrectly, but it is actually a serious distinction[2]. I would agree however that Linux is the most widely used OS kernel. To make the distinction more obvious, can you explain what the difference is between "Linux" and Android (which uses the Linux kernel). [ Hint: the difference is that A…

Linux is a class of operating systems which use the Linux kernel. Referring to Linux as an OS, is a perfectly fine thing to generically mean 'an OS which uses Linux as a kernel' and has an agreed common meaning.

Almost no Operating System is precisely GNU/Linux - most have vim, an X server, GNOME or KDE, 7zip etc. And the argument that GNU is a more principal argument is incorrect.

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#104

Post by afsina »

tw04 wrote: post #99
zanny wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linux is a kernel, not an OS, and Microsoft has been abjectly hostile to the OSes that use Linux and respect user freedoms. If they weren't, they would have never pushed hostile proprietary vendor lock in tech like DirectX12 or Universal Windows Platform in recent years.

So Redhat is hostile towards Linux too then, right? Because if they weren't, they wouldn't push their competing products against Canonical or Suse. Just because companies release competing, incompatible products, doesn't mean they're "hostile" towards one another.

Well, MS is still extorting money from android vendors using os related patents.

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#105

Post by An9238 »

1281281918 wrote: post #54
jepler wrote: post #7

first they mock you, then they fight you, then they coopt you, then they win.

Don't forget that we have the New Microsoft[tm] ! Source: Hacker News.

Hacker News is really the site with the least amount of self criticism on the entire Internet.

'dang, go ahead and do you thing.

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#106

Post by winter_blue »

vidarh wrote: post #88
winter_blue wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the Mythical Man-Mnth says, you can't build software faster by adding more programmers. So not much, unless the work they have to do is highly parallelizable (i.e. can be broken up), and would truly benefit from more developers. I can imagine KDE benefiting from this, because KDE is an umbrella organization with hundreds (if not thousands) of projects underneath it.

The vast majority of the kernel code is a massive number of drivers and subsystems that can be worked on independendly. A better funded Linux Foundation could also invest in better tooling (better compilers, better test rigs), and in research on speculative improvements to pretty much every subsystem.

Yea, good point.

But on that note, I never understood why they track the drivers in the same git repo as the kernel.

They should just develop a stable kernel API for drivers, and have extract the drivers out and track them separately from kernel development.

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#107

Post by tn13 »

bomdo wrote: post #20

Apparently, being a platinum member entails donating $500k [1], so it's not that big a deal for Microsoft ($85B revenue[2]). And as the article states, there has been negativity in the linux community regarding the old arch-enemy joining their ranks. Looking at the new Microsoft however, I think it's fair to assume that the days of "embrace, extend and extinguish"[3] are over and they are genuinely interested in coop…

> being a platinum member entails donating $500k

The important thing about this news is not the title or the amount. The important thing to notice that Microsoft has moved from extreme hostility to active co-operation with general Linux community. This is a good move and it benefits Linux community lot more than Microsoft.

I always felt that it was needless to paint MS/Linux as some kind of zero some game to begin with. Sad that MS's top leadership fell prey to it in the initial years trying to hurt Linux.

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#108

Post by tn13 »

cyphar wrote: post #92
paulddraper wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(1) That's hair splitting of common usage. Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux "Linux was originally developed as a free operating system for personal computers based on the Intel x86 architecture" "Linux has the largest installed base of all general-purpose operating systems." "Linux is not the only such operating system" "Linux is also the leading operating system on servers and other big iron systems" I'm…

> (1) That's hair splitting of common usage. The operating system's technical name is GNU/Linux[1]. Many people call it Linux incorrectly, but it is actually a serious distinction[2]. I would agree however that Linux is the most widely used OS kernel. To make the distinction more obvious, can you explain what the difference is between "Linux" and Android (which uses the Linux kernel). [ Hint: the difference is that A…

Even more hair splitting here. Your arguments would matter in court but in general I think it is fairly easy to understand what a user means when he says Linux. For example I say Android is based on Linux.

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#109

Post by ickler8 »

mhall119 wrote: post #91
finid wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get the impression that he wants to leave the cloud to linux and try to position Windows as a user-facing client. Is that why they're pushing the Azure cloud service - to benefit Linux?

Considering 50% of Azure instances are Linux, perhaps?

other way around.

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#110

Post by tw04 »

afsina wrote: post #104
tw04 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So Redhat is hostile towards Linux too then, right? Because if they weren't, they wouldn't push their competing products against Canonical or Suse. Just because companies release competing, incompatible products, doesn't mean they're "hostile" towards one another.

Well, MS is still extorting money from android vendors using os related patents.

That's completely irrelevant. But "extorting" is more than a BIT of a stretch. They've got valid patents that Android handset makers need. Just like they need licensing to even put a cellular modem in the phone in the first place.

If you honestly think Samsung would willingly hand over $10-15 per handset over bunk patents, I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona you might be interested in.

Post reply on HN